Alongside this, four Knowledge Transfer Networks Nanotechnology, Materials, Chemistry Innovation and Sensors and Instrumentation with significant industrial interest in nanotechnology ag
Trang 2Dr Matthew Thornton Materials KTN / Materials UK
Dr Robin Young Materials KTN
Dr Barry Park Nanotechnology KTN
wITh SUPPORT FROM:
Dr Steve Fletcher Chemistry Innovation KTN
Darren Ragheb Chemistry Innovation KTN
Dr Colin Johnson Materials KTN
Stuart MacLachlan Materials KTN
Dr Robert Quarshie Materials KTN / Materials UK
Dr Alec Reader Nanotechnology KTN
Tiju Joseph Sensors and Instrumentation KTN
Dr Andrew Burgess AkzoNobel
Dr John Saffell Alphasense Ltd &
Chairman of CoGDEM
Dr victor higgs Applied Nanodetectors Ltd
Dr Alan Smith AZ-TECh
Dr Matthew O'Donnell BioCeramic Therapeutics Ltd
Dr Ian Pallett British water
Prof Kai Cheng Brunel University
Dr Bojan Boskovic Cambridge Nanomaterials Technology Ltd
Dr Roger Pullin Chemical Industries Association
Dr Didier Farrugia Corus
Prof Derek Sheldon Derek Sheldon Consultants Ltd
Dr Brian More Exilica Ltd
Prof Julian Jones heriot-watt University
David Kent The Institute of Measurement and Control
Dr Mark Morrison Institute of Nanotechnology
Del Stark Institute of Nanotechnology
Dr Paul Reip Intrinsiq Materials Ltd
Dr Peter hatto IonBond Ltd
Andrew Elphick Iota NanoSolutions Limited
Dr Kevin Matthews Isogenica Ltd
Dr Sam French Johnson Matthey
Dr Brendan Casey Kelvin Nanotechnology Ltd
Simon Allison Marks & Spencer Plc
Dr Neil Ebenezer Medicines & healthcare Products
Regulatory AgencyProf Ben Beake Micro Materials LtdTom warwick NanoInk Inc
Prof Terence A wilkins Nanomanufacturing Institute,
University of Leeds
Dr Mike Fisher Nanotechnology KTN
Dr Neil harrison National Physical Laboratory
Dr Piers Andrew Nokia Research Centre
Dr Gareth Wakefield Oxford Advanced Surfaces Group plc
Dr Peter Luke Pfizer
Dr Al Lambourne Rolls Royce PlcNeil Gray Scott Bader Co LtdPhil Cooper Sensors and Instrumentation KTNJonathan Foulkes Smith & Nephew Extruded Films LtdChristian Inglis Technology Strategy Board
Dr Kevin Cooke Teer Coatings Ltd
Dr Michael Butler Unilever Research ColworthProf Sergey Mikhalovsky University of Brighton
Dr Neil Bowering University of GlasgowProf David Cumming University of GlasgowProf Ping Xiao University of ManchesterProf John Gray University of ManchesterProf Peter Dobson University of OxfordProf Julian Gardner University of warwickENDORSEES
Prior to publication of the report, the following people have contacted the secretariat to endorse the report and its recommendations
Trang 3Nanotechnology is the basis for
many products that are in common
use and is providing the capability
to produce a very wide range of
new products that will become
commonplace in the near future The
UK, like many other countries, has
invested heavily in nanotechnology
and has considered, through a
series of reports and Government
responses, how to manage and fund
nanotechnology developments At the
third meeting of the Ministerial Group
on Nanotechnology it was agreed that
a nanotechnology strategy should be
developed for the UK
As part of the strategy development
process, Lord Drayson launched an
evidence gathering website on 7th July
2009 Alongside this, four Knowledge
Transfer Networks (Nanotechnology,
Materials, Chemistry Innovation
and Sensors and Instrumentation)
with significant industrial interest in
nanotechnology agreed that it was
necessary for industry to contribute to
policy development using the bottom
up approach It is intended that this
report with its unique industry led
views on nanotechnology will provide
a significant contribution to a future
overarching UK Government
Strategy on Nanotechnology,
alongside other input from inter alia
the Technology Strategy Board and
the Research Councils
Executive Summary
Feedback was sought from industry using a questionnaire and workshop discussions with invited industry leaders and others in the field of nanotechnology to gather information
on what they are currently doing and what their future needs are to create enhanced value from nanotechnology
A full review of UK and international strategic approaches was also undertaken This report considers where the UK currently sits in terms
of investment in comparison with its major industrial competitors and reviews the UK’s capability to exploit nanotechnology given the organisations and funding bodies currently in place
Future opportunities are also reviewed alongside issues that must be addressed
to ensure responsible development of nanotechnology based products
The following recommendations on Policy and Regulation, Funding, Skills and Engagement have been developed
to provide a basis for implementation
of the Government Strategy based
on this feedback and are listed below A view is also given of what the UK status on nanotechnology would be in 2020 assuming that the recommendations are followed
in the intervening years These recommendations are in line with the
UK Government’s strategy for New Industry, New Jobs which is part of Building Britain’s Future
POLICY AND REGULATION
Nanotechnology innovation and exploitation is
1
business driven The department responsible for leading and coordinating nanotechnology activities across Government should be the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) to ensure investment provides added value for the UK
The Technology Strategy Board must implement
2
its Nanoscale Technologies Strategy with specific funded calls to deliver commercialisation of value adding nanotechnology based products
Government should address the need for
3
responsible development of all emerging technologies, including nanotechnologies, by putting in place a framework through which product risk assessments can be carried out alongside industry’s need to focus on innovation
Defra, other Government Departments, relevant
4
KTNs and trade associations should engage with industry to ensure the effective operation of a simplified Voluntary Reporting Scheme in the UK for nanomaterials and to work with
EU regulators to ensure ongoing REACh regulations take account of nanotechnology fully and effectively
Invest in key establishments and
Continue to support knowledge transfer
5
activities to deliver innovation in nanotechnology and pull through academic research into commercial applications
in nanotechnology from technician level
to develop individuals with the skills and expertise to support commercialisation of nanotechnology in the UK
ENGAGEMENT
Ensure that the general public is informed of
1
product developments based on nanotechnology
Industry and Government should engage in an
Trang 41 Introduction
Nanotechnology provides a significant opportunity to address global challenges This is leading
to intense global competition to commercialise different products enabled by nanotechnology However,
UK industry is well placed to capitalise on this opportunity and participate in the development of many new products and services by operating alone or in collaboration with international partners Success
in this area will lead to growth in employment and wealth creation
Today, nanotechnology is evolving with some mature products and many
in the growth and developmental stage This is not unlike the condition
of computer science in the 1960s
or biotechnology in the 1980s
Nanotechnology has been applied
to the development of products and processes across many industries particularly over the past ten years
Products are now available in markets ranging from consumer products through medical products to plastics and coatings and electronics products
There have been various market reports estimating the scale of potential future value for products
that are “nanotechnology enabled”
Details of a number of these are reported in section 8 A report from Lux Research published in 2006 entitled The Nanotech Report 4th Edition1, notes that nanotechnology was incorporated into more than
$30 billion in manufactured goods in
2005 The projection is that in 2014,
$2.6 trillion in manufactured goods will incorporate nanotechnology Even
if this is an over-estimate, it is clear that there is a vast market available for nanotechnology based products
It is extremely important to the UK economy that UK companies engaged
in nanotechnology participate at each stage of the supply chain
While companies are moving speedily to develop further and more advanced products based on nanotechnology, they are becoming increasingly aware that there are many challenges to address It was with this background that a Mini Innovation and Growth Team (Mini-IGT) was formed comprising members of the Nanotechnology KTN and the Materials KTN as the secretariat together with members of the Chemistry Innovation KTN and the
Sensors and Instrumentation KTN to prepare a report on nanotechnology
on behalf of UK industry A questionnaire (see Section 2) was sent to the members of the various KTNs to solicit feedback on their views on nanotechnology focussing
on their commercial position and also their concerns and issues This report considers the status of nanotechnology
in the UK today and provides recommendations in response to the concerns and issues raised
While the UK Government has commissioned reports and provided responses over the past decade,
in the field of nanotechnology (see Appendices), the UK has not articulated an overarching national strategy on nanotechnology that can rank alongside those from the likes of the US and Germany It is intended that this report, with its unique industry led views on nanotechnology, together with other strategic documents, including the Nanoscale Technologies Strategy 2009-2012 produced by the Technology Strategy Board, will provide a significant contribution to a future UK Government Strategy on Nanotechnology
Nanotechnology is defined by
The British Standards Institution
(BSI) as the:
“Design, characterisation,
production and application of
structures, devices and systems
by controlling shape and size in
the nanoscale, which covers the
size range from approximately
1nm to 100nm.”
Trang 52 Industry Response
to Questionnaire
A web based survey was undertaken
where answers to eight key questions
were solicited to ascertain how
important nanotechnology was to
UK industry and determine how UK
Government can assist in further
developing the commercial landscape
The specific questions were:
1 Where does your company
fit in the supply chain
regarding nanotechnology?
2 What commercial / development
products based on
nanotechnology do you have?
3 What resources are focussed on
nanotechnology based products?
4 What alliances / partnerships
do you have to exploit
nanotechnology?
5 What percentage of your sales
is based on nanotechnology
based products?
6 How long has your company
been involved in developing and/
or selling products based
on nanotechnology?
7 What Governmental funding
have you received to support
your nanotechnology business?
8 Where should company and
Government funding on
nanotechnology be focussed for
the next ten years?
The questionnaire, together with the
outputs from two workshops, has been
used to generate the recommendations
listed in the following section This section presents the outputs from the questionnaire The respondents to the questionnaire covered the entire supply chain, from fundamental research through nanomaterial producers, equipment suppliers, system integrators and end users They represented the major market sectors important to the UK economy including medical/
pharmaceutical, aerospace and defence, chemical, food and automotive
The respondents were classified as large, medium or small to medium enterprises, universities or others such
as trade associations etc (see Figure 1) As might be expected the largest segment of responses was from SMEs
However, 20% of the respondents were from large companies representing some of the UK’s leading blue chips
The SMEs generally devoted the majority of their resource to nanotechnology with many calling themselves “a nanotechnology company” With larger companies the emphasis was more on their products
or sectors viewing nanotechnology as
an enabler to a commercial product serving an established sector with multidisciplinary teams assembled as and when required Nearly all those who responded either had established relationships or were actively developing networks of partners and alliances; these were most commonly with universities to help develop the fundamental understanding of the products or with the supply chain to help delivery of commercial products
Most of the respondents had zero
or low (less than 25%) sales in nanotechnology related products (see Figure 2) This might be expected from the large number of SMEs who responded, many of which are less than
5 years old and are still in product/
process development and have yet
to bring any commercial products
to market However, some 26% of the respondents were significantly
or entirely (i.e 100% of sales) nanotechnology enabled companies
Several of the larger well established companies answering our questionnaire had a significant proportion of their business in nanoenabled products
The maturity of the commercial sales
on the whole reflected the time that most companies had been trading in nanotechnology enabled products
Some 34% of all respondents have been involved in nanotechnology for more than 10 years (see Figure 3)
Perhaps of most interest were the responses to question 8: Where should company and Government funding on nanotechnology be focussed for the next ten years? As might be expected there was a wide range of answers
However, several common themes emerged:
The UK should continue
1
to support the UK’s leading position in driving global standards for nanotechnology
Strategic longer term research
2
programmes focused on employing nanotechnology solutions for larger challenge led societal problems such as
ageing population and healthcare, low carbon economy, safety and security, with less emphasis on new nanoparticles or materials
“Joined up” thinking on EHS
3
concerns with managed programmes across the supply chain from university research
to actual practice in industry and end of life An essential component
is also providing the public with a balanced picture of the true risks and advantages of nanotechnology
Support for product development,
4
including translational development and knowledge management especially for SMEs
Some of the comments that were received included:
“E.ON believes that there are great opportunities for the development
of nanotechnology-based products particularly in renewable energy systems which will help to create a low-carbon future”
“Addressing market needs through collaborative development and knowledge exchange where companies can work together and/or access the strong UK academic base for new products and processes and where universities can strategically develop research streams based on the commercial needs of industry” Kelvin Nanotechnology
“Investment in product focussed enabling technologies and step change technologies that benefit UK plc and establish the UK as a skills centre for novel, emerging technologies.” Rolls- Royce
Figure 1
Classification of respondents to questionnaire
Figure 3
Breakdown
of the time companies had been involved with nanotechnology
Figure 2
Breakdown
of the sales based on nanotechnology enabled products
Less than 1 year
40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5
26%
59%
4%
Trang 63.1 Policy and Regulation
1 Nanotechnology innovation and exploitation is business driven
The department responsible for leading and coordinating nanotechnology activities across Government should be the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) to ensure investment provides added value for the UK
To ensure commercial success for the UK in nanotechnology, BIS should be the champion for nanotechnology and collaborate with other departments and agencies including Defra, Research Councils, Environment Agency, Health and Safety Executive, Health Protection Agency and Department of Health amongst others
2 The Technology Strategy Board must implement its Nanoscale Technologies Strategy with specific funded calls to deliver commercialisation of value adding nanotechnology based products
Investment in nanotechnology must be industry led and focussed on taking practical, useful and valuable research through to commercialisation i.e from fundamental research through prototyping and pilot manufacturing to full scale manufacturing This means that the Technology Strategy Board
has to focus on industrial needs, especially those identified within the Grand Challenges, and work alongside other funding bodies including the Research Councils
to bring organisations and companies together to exploit novel technologies quickly and effectively
3 Government should address the need for responsible development
of all emerging technologies, including nanotechnologies, by putting in place a framework through which product risk assessments can be carried out alongside industry’s need to focus
at a point in the development cycle before revenues have been generated It should be noted that the chemical legislation REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and restriction of Chemicals) has the framework for
3 Recommendations
to Government
developing this for nanomaterials during their research and development phase
This recommendation is in line with Government’s interests in this area as noted in the Statement
by the Government about Nanotechnology published in February 2008 where they state its vision for nanotechnologies
to be: “for the UK to derive
maximum economic, environmental and societal benefit from the development and commercialisation
of nanotechnologies, and to be in the forefront of international activity
to ensure there is appropriate control of potential risks to health, safety and the environment”.
4 Defra, other Government Departments, relevant KTNs and trade associations should engage with industry to ensure the effective operation of a simplified Voluntary Reporting Scheme in the UK for nanomaterials and to work with EU regulators to ensure ongoing REACH regulations take account of nanotechnology fully and effectively
The Voluntary Reporting Scheme,
to monitor and regulate the use of nanotechnology based materials and products, has advantages but needs to be simplified for industry to participate Imposing
a Mandatory Scheme is fraught with difficulties both in terms
of definition and in terms of
monitoring and policing what has or has not been reported
It will also stifle UK innovation and competitiveness if imports are not required to comply with
a UK based mandatory scheme
Sanctions for not reporting would have to be made clear Further, any scheme has to be EU-wide and subject to EU regulations including REACH
3.2 Funding
1 Provide more accessible and commercially focussed funding for SMEs as well as larger companies engaged in the development of nanotechnology based products to support innovation in the UK
No mechanism exists to ensure continuity of funding developments through to commercialisation The need for small scale funding is evident from the interest from industry in the recent Technology Strategy Board Beacons call Larger collaborative R&D funding is not always suitable for pre-product demonstrator
or proof of concept to drive research through the Technology Readiness Levels To complement Technology Strategy Board funding the Research Councils should fund more industrially relevant research in this area
Industry has expressed concern that collaboration with universities leads to very low grant ratios for industry This is a disincentive for industry and in particular SME/
university collaboration and needs
to be addressed as part of the funding processes
2 Invest in key establishments and organisations to build world class capability in nanotechnology product development
Focus on centres capable
of delivering world class nanotechnology research and development, risk assessment and characterisation through
to manufacturing Invest in and drive to international success centres that can be (or already are) world class To do this the
UK could learn from the German Fraunhofer model, for example
by creating critical mass through consolidation of existing facilities and organisations
3 Provide funding for cross-sectoral initiatives to apply developments achieved in one sector to other sectors and applications
Developments based on nanotechnology in one product area may be transferable to other product areas Ensuring this happens efficiently can provide significant added value for the UK
4 Continue to invest in standardisation activities to maintain UK leadership in creating international standards for nanotechnology and National Measurement System facilities
This will ensure that the UK maintains its influence in defining
This report, informed and led by
the UK’s nanotechnology industry,
recommends that the following
are paramount to the successful
exploitation of nanotechnology in
the UK These are listed under four
headings and under each heading the
recommendations are ranked in order
of importance These recommendations
focus on areas where Government can
make a significant difference
Trang 7develop individuals with the skills and expertise to support commercialisation of nanotechnology in the UK
Training of the UK workforce through Professional Development (PD) is essential
as an innovation led economy is going to require a highly skilled workforce The need is for a range of courses including short courses on specific areas of nanotechnology which should
be coordinated through the appropriate Sector Skills Councils
3.4 Engagement
1 Ensure that the general public is informed of product developments based on nanotechnology
Industry, trade associations and professional bodies should provide “technology champions”
to engage with the public on the benefits of nanotechnology and ensure that any potential concerns are understood and that responses from Government, academia and companies are balanced and factual
2 Industry and Government should engage in an evidence based dialogue with the Unions and Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs)
Unions and NGOs need to be provided with scientific evidence
standards for “nano” through
the work conducted by BSI and
in association with CEN, ASTM
and ISO Emphasis should also
be on developing and promoting
measurement techniques
in support of technology
requirements for standards This
investment is required in the
short to medium term given that
there is not a critical mass of
nanotechnology based industry to
support this activity
5 Continue to support knowledge
transfer activities to deliver
innovation in nanotechnology and
pull through academic research
into commercial applications
Knowledge Transfer Networks
must continue to collaborate with
industry to deliver innovation
in the cross disciplinary field of
nanotechnology
3.3 Skills
1 Develop world class professional
education programmes at all
levels covering all aspects of
nanotechnology
Given the multidisciplinary
nature of nanotechnology it is
appropriate that it is covered
within existing science, technology,
engineering and mathematics
It is crucial that this success follows through to commercialisation and the key to exploitation of this technical base is considered in this report with
a series of recommendations provided
in Chapter 3 It is believed that only if these recommendations are followed then the UK can become a successful player in the commercialisation of nanotechnology leading to significant societal and economic benefits Below
is a list of how the UK may be viewed
in 2020:
• World class and integrated nanotechnology centres derived from the original set of MNT centres
• Body of UK trained scientists, engineers and managers capable of ensuring significant growth in commercialisation of nanotechnology based products
• Research Council and other Government funded programmes focussed on next generation nanotechnologies addressing Grand Challenge needs
• Thriving nanotechnology SME community working with Government ensuring funding is directed in a timely fashion to grow value-adding nanotechnology based businesses
• International regulation for nanotechnology agreed and understood by all with definitions and standards the basis for the regulation
• The UK embedded in strong international nanotechnology business collaborations
• Acceptance that processes for risk assessment and life cycle analysis for nanotechnology are
no different in principle than for other technologies, and are conducted as a matter of standard practice by companies developing nanomaterials or nanotechnology based products
• Family of nanotechnology based drugs and diagnostics products developed in the UK that ensure that the UK remains at the forefront of providing health benefits through its world class pharmaceutical businesses
• Family of nanotechnology based products developed in the UK that contribute to the Low Carbon Economy
• Public understanding that nanotechnology like any other technology has its benefits and risks and that these are considered and managed as part of the development of any nanotechnology based product
• The UK recognised as a leader within The Organisation for Economic Co-ordination and Development (OECD) with respect to best practice in the development, manufacture and risk management of nanotechnology based products
• UK led robust platforms for metrology and modelling
and data as a sound basis for dialogue There is also a need for NGOs to produce their own data
in support of their arguments to understand potential issues that need to be addressed
3 Provide support for two-way international collaboration to gather and share an information base on nanotechnology
As nanotechnology is a global industry, international collaboration is essential for its exploitation The provision of this could come through inter alia UK Trade and Investment (UKTI), the Science and Innovation Network, Technology Missions and the Technology Strategy Board
4 Government and industry should assist banking and insurance companies in understanding nanotechnology to enable sound investments to be made
Banks and insurers need to be provided with evidence based commercial information including environmental, health and safety data on which to base investment and insurance decisions
in support of ongoing nanotechnology business needs
• A comprehensive standards infrastructure to support industry and other stakeholders
• UK developed nanotechnology based products manufactured in the Developing World for local use to address major health and welfare issues
• The UK recognised as the leading centre for investment management and financial products related to nanotechnology
Trang 8Nanotechnology in the UK has to
be viewed in the context of world
wide activity in the field Details of
the approaches taken by different
countries are in the Appendices
The UK is not alone in determining
a strategy for nanotechnology and
has produced strategies by and for
the Research Councils2 and the
Technology Strategy Board3 However,
there is no overall strategy for
nanosciences and nanotechnology
6 Size of UK Industry
The analysis of the UK’s industrial and academic capability was based on data provided by the Nanotechnology KTN This included the Nanotechnology KTN directory along with various contact databases provided by Nanotechnology KTN staff These various databases were merged and further analysis carried out to present as comprehensive
a picture as possible of the UK nanotechnology capability landscape
There are a number of issues associated with this information that should be considered, namely:
• The limitations in the way that the Nanotechnology KTN database reflects the reality of the UK’s nanotechnology industrial base – many companies that are known
to have nanotechnology capability are missing and, in addition, there are companies on the database that could be suppliers but do not have any actual nanotechnology capability
• Many of the companies listed
in the database are suppliers
or potential suppliers to nanotechnology companies rather than actually having capability in this area
• The Directory is self-selecting
so many companies that have nanotechnology capability or expertise have chosen not to be included
• The focus is on SMEs so many of the larger UK companies active in this area are missing
The final industrial database contained over 800 companies although, realistically only about one quarter of these are companies for which nanotechnology makes up a significant proportion of their business
Nonetheless, the following analysis gives
a feel for the UK’s nanotechnology capability and areas of expertise
There is a core base of ca 100 nanomaterials companies, consisting
of mostly users and a small number of manufacturers, who are active in the
UK Figure 4 shows the distribution of these companies by activity
This clearly shows that, by far, the largest number of companies are active in thin films and nanocoatings,
with 35 companies indicating this as
an area of expertise This is followed
by biological nanomaterials, with 23 companies, and then a cluster of companies with expertise in a range
of nanomaterials specifically carbon based nanomaterials, nano-inorganics, nanoparticulate metals and alloys and nano-ceramics
In addition, there are 23 companies indicating capability in nanoelectronics and a further 12 MEMS companies It
is our view that this final figure is low and this may be a reflection of the fact that the Nanotechnology KTN database is self selecting and some companies may have chosen not to include themselves on it
Figure 4
UK Nanomaterials Companies by Activity5
5 International Approaches to
Nanotechnology Strategy
and this report and subsequent work should form the basis of such a strategy that will lay out the
UK approach and basis for future investment in this burgeoning area
of technology It is crucial that this
is done promptly and clearly as the information in the Appendices summarises the efforts of other countries and confirms that the UK lags behind countries such as South Africa4 in relation to ‘nano’ strategy
Trang 96.1 Nanotechnology Support
Infrastructure
In addition to the nanomaterials and devices companies, there are a large number of companies that could be classified under support infrastructure
As has already been discussed, many
of these companies have indicated that they are suppliers of products and services to nanotechnology producers and users That is not to say that they have actual nanotechnology capability so Figure 5 should be viewed with that in mind
6.2 Nanotechnology Applications
The final piece of analysis was to determine the market application focus of the companies on the database This is shown in Figure 6
In addition, as was highlighted previously, the UK also has a strong emerging capability in large area electronics, the manufacture of which requires highly specialised inks and coatings In the area of ICT hardware,
an emerging UK strength is in printed, large area electronics, the advancement
of which will rely strongly on nanoscale technologies There could, therefore, be
an excellent opportunity for the UK
to gain a real competitive advantage
in this area through a multi disciplinary approach to novel design, development and commercialisations, for example, low power lighting and displays In addition, there has been significant public investment in the development
of nanoelectro-mechanical systems (NEMS) and nanosensors, especially in academia To date this has not however been exploited to any great extent
There is therefore a good opportunity
to exploit these technologies and capabilities in the shorter term, for example in areas such as photonics and plastics electronics
Similarly, in the sensors area, the UK has a competitive strength in sensor technologies for measurement, monitoring and control both in academia and industry so it is not surprising that a micro and
nanotechnology capability in this area
is apparent
The UK life sciences industry is also a major success story – the pharmaceutical industry alone produced annual exports of £17.2 billion in 2008 When one then adds the major biotech activity, which
is second only to the US, and the medical device sector, the UK is a leading powerhouse of innovation and commercialisation in this area
In order to ensure the UK remains a world leader in this sector, government, academia and industry must adopt, develop and support the next wave
of technology, which can deliver the products of the future Nanotechnology
is one area that promises to provide that necessary innovation
Accurately predicting future markets
is a significant challenge within in the medical nanotech field and some of the figures placed in the public domain appear huge beyond imagination
However, as the regulatory pathway becomes clearer and companies start
to gain approvals, nanotechnology will become more main-stream in healthcare and life sciences and its share of the market will increase significantly A comparison with the biotech industry could be drawn here Twenty years ago biotechnology had similar issues as nanotech faces now It was seen as not having a clear regulatory pathway and not being able to be handled by the existing pharmaceutical company manufacturing capabilities and supply chain Adoption
of the technology therefore became
an issue Now (prior to Roche’s recent purchase of Genentech) two of the top twenty pharmaceutical companies
in the world are biotechnology companies and two of the top ten blockbuster drugs are biologics
There are signs that this could be repeated with nanotechnology once the benefits are demonstrated and a route to market becomes clear There are now around 30 nanoenabled drugs
on the market, representing $30B in revenue These are first-generation nanoenabled drugs, i.e reformulations
of generic products As the regulatory and adoption pathway becomes clear, the second-generation products should appear, where the nano element provides targeting, or sensing functionality
Healthcare and life sciences presents a major opportunity for nanotechnology and nanoenabled products This is, however, a very wide ranging sector and within it, there are distinct sub-sectors with very different supply chains Considering UK capability there are three areas that offer the greatest potential opportunities, namely drug delivery, drug discovery tools and medical devices (including diagnostics)
In these sectors the UK has worldwide recognition Significant progress has been achieved through strong cohesion between leading academic groups and industry, but there is intense international competition that threatens to draw talent, businesses and intellectual assets from the UK
Nanotechnology can be used on the large scale in high throughput industries such as the steel industry For example, new strong bainitic steel could be made from structures analogous to carbon nanotubes Nano-injection during casting may also provide large scale potential benefits
ug Deliv
eryFibre OpticsFuel CellsPlastic P ackaging Speciality Chemicals
PackagingSolar Cells Sensor
s Composites Catal
ysts Displa ys
Textiles and Clothing Data Stor age
Trang 108.1 International Context
UK Government spending must be seen in the context of worldwide spending in the area Lux Research state that Government spending in North America, Asia and Europe are significant (US$1.1B to US$1.7B each in 2005) on researching and developing nanotechnology
Similar amounts are invested by industry in each region In 2006 worldwide funding for nanotechnology reached US$11.8B, which is a 13%
increase from 2005 according to the latest report by Lux Research This is
an indication that nanotechnology is viewed as a serious and important element to the world’s future economy
Newer players are also entering the field with some heavy commitments
For example, it has recently been announced that a nanotechnology funding programme in Russia has just been approved8, making it the largest
in the world, with $3.95B earmarked until 2015
The German Government has supported nanotechnology since the 1980s, and Germany is now the leading player in nanotechnology in Europe in terms of funding, number
of companies and dedicated research centres Germany ranks among the top four nanotechnology locations worldwide Its position is based on a
well structured R&D infrastructure and high levels of research in the various subfields of nanotechnology
The industrial base for utilising the results of this research is also in place
Public nanotechnology funding in Germany is mainly distributed through the country’s network of research institutes – Fraunhofer, Max Planck, and Leibniz – and universities German research institutions are global leaders
in nanotechnology-related basic research The institutes are an effective interface between basic research and industry, helping to transform basic research into applications Funding bodies include the BMBF, the research foundation DFG, the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft and Max Planck Institutes,
the Volkswagen Foundation, and the German States
According to the German Government there are 1,000 plus companies active in the field, with
an estimated €420M public-sector investment in 2008 Germany is also home to numerous global nanotechnology players such as BASF, Bayer, Siemens, Carl Zeiss and Evonik
8.1.1 PUBLIC FUNDING RATIOS FOR NANOTEChNOLOGY R&D
Table 1 shows the estimated public sector funding for nanotechnology R&D in 2008, based on official Government websites and documents from each country6 This shows the actual level of funding in US $ as well
7 Diversity of Business
Nanotechnology is relevant to many
branches of materials, electronics,
chemistry, biology, medical science
and engineering This leads to
some problems in regulatory
approaches because the wide range
of applications and approaches
naturally lends itself to different sets
of requirements according to the
industry context
It should be pointed out there
are many industries which have
been using nanotechnology for
decades even before the term
“nanotechnology” had been coined
For example, carbon black and silica are both produced and used in large volumes
Many sectors involve products which are formulations, often including fine
or colloidal particles These include personal care, cosmetics, household products, food, coatings, inks, dyes, additives for fuels and lubricants and pharmaceuticals The incorporation
of nanoparticles into such products, compared with similar materials as larger “fine” particles, holds out the
8 Investment to Date
Table 2
Corporate funding for nanotechnology6
Country Actual funding
levels Funding levels per capita
Country Actual funding
levels Funding levels per capita
Nanomaterials can be considered
in the following categories – the two large volume commercial nanomaterials, carbon black and silica; nanoparticles including metals and metal oxides; nanotubes and nanofibres; quantum dots;
nanocapsules; nanowires; graphene;
nanostructured materials and coatings and surfaces Details of these are found in the Appendices
Trang 11as the funding levels per capita The implications are clear – the UK public sector funding is lagging behind our global competitors both in terms of the absolute spend and in terms of its per capita spend.
8.1.2 CORPORATE FUNDING FOR NANOTEChNOLOGY R&D
Up to date, reliable data on corporate funding is not readily accessible Lux Research1 however, produced a report
in 2005 which estimated corporate nanotechnology R&D spending in US$ Although now four years old, it does give an indication of the levels of relative spend in the UK and each of the international comparators Again, this data is presented as actual funding levels and per capita funding levels and
However, when the funding is considered on a per capita basis, Japan clearly moves into a dominant position
Like many areas of technology, Japanese companies invest heavily in R&D The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) World Competitiveness Report 2008-
2009 indicates that Japan is one of the world-leaders in the areas of “business sophistication and innovation” which
the WEF suggests is as a result of “a
high availability of scientists and engineers, high company spending on R&D and an excellent capacity for innovation” This is
reflected in the levels of spending on nanotechnology R&D
Interestingly, once again, Taiwan moves into a more dominant position, ahead
of Germany, France and the UK, when funding levels per capita are considered Where Japan is a world leader in corporate R&D spend, the
UK, in general, has a low industrial R&D spend OECD highlights that in
2006, business enterprise expenditure
on R&D was < 1.2% of GDP in the
UK compared with ~ 1.6 % of GDP
in the total OECD It is therefore not surprising that corporate funding for nanotechnology R&D is low
8.2 UK Government Spend on
Nanotechnology over the last
of MNT funding so that funding on nanotechnology according to accepted classification is likely to be less
With this proviso, the estimated Government support for nanotechnology over the last 12 years has exceeded £640M, as detailed in Table 3
As there is currently no UK strategy for nanotechnology and current support mechanisms, current spending reviews and the fact that future funding priorities will lie with the Technology Strategy Board, the Research Councils and relevant Government Departments and Agencies it is not yet possible to say how much the Government will spend on nanotechnology over the next ten years
8.3 UK Government Spend on MNT Facilities
The last five years has seen a significant cash injection from the public sector into the UK micro and nanotechnology (MNT) community including a £90M investment on the development of a new network of MNT facilities and services, of which £40M was allocated
to support and enhance collaborative research programmes and technology transfer initiatives, and £50M for capital projects and the development of the Nanotechnology KTN Details of the MNT facilities are in the Appendices
€300-400M spent in 2007
Access to EU funding through FP7 programmes can support projects that otherwise may not have been funded
by UK Government or industry alone
or in combination However, uptake of
EU funding through FP7 programmes
is weakened by the perception that the route to funding requires too much investment in proposal development against low expectations of approval
8.5 Research Council Funding
EPSRC support for nanotechnology, classified by the Socio-economic Theme in Nanotechnology EPSRC13, has amounted to £253M (since 2003) distributed over a portfolio
of some 400 projects According to the Nanoscale Technologies Strategy 2009-20123 report by the Technology Strategy Board, the main recipients of EPSRC nanoscale technology funding (2008 data) are shown in Table 4
Notable recent initiatives include the Grand Challenge for Healthcare14
£16.6M (19 projects) and the Grand Challenge for Energy15 £6.78M (2 projects)
Trang 12Nanomaterials and nanotechnologies can be applied to address most of today’s societal challenges and this leads to significant opportunities
Nanoscale technology can be considered as a set of enabling technologies, leading to novel properties which can then be incorporated into products that can
be marketed across a range of sectors
Previous estimates of the size of the market are now held to be inflated according to current thinking A more realistic view of the impact of nanoscale technologies within existing market sectors has been reported by Nanoposts18 Based on this report, the key sectors that are most likely to be impacted by nanoscale technologies and the associated market size estimates are summarised in Table 5
to grow to $85.7B by 2015
Even in this more conservative forecast, the size of the market growth available is disruptive The value of nanoenabled products produced in
2007 was estimated by Lux Research1
as $147B This is expected to reach
$1.6T in 201319 and $3.1T in 2015
These figures should be taken with a note of caution, however, as the estimated market value varies significantly depending on the source of the data This is clearly demonstrated in Figure 7
It can be seen that, despite the significant range of values (ranging from $750B in 2015 quoted by Wintergreen20 to $3,100B in 2015 quoted by Lux Research1) the market opportunity for nanoenabled products is significant with large scale commercialisation and, hence, market growth predicted to take place in
2010 and 2011 It must be clearly stated, however, that this predicted revenue is not all in addition to current revenues – many nanoenabled products will replace current
conventional products to meet increasing demands for enhanced product performance, specifically:
• Product miniaturisation
• Enhanced product functionality
• Increased product efficiency
The Ministry of Defence (MoD), Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC), Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and Medical Research Council (MRC) contributed funds totalling £19.4M (£3.4M, £3M, £10M and £3M, respectively) towards running the Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IRCs) in nanotechnology including those at Oxford and Cambridge Universities16
8.6 Private Funding Ratios for Exploitation of Nanotechnology
The published data for worldwide nanotechnology funding1 in 2004 showed that total European and
US funding levels have near parity
at around $3000M each but the breakdown differs: private funding
in the EU is of the order of $1300M comparing with $1700M in the US
The ratio of private funding in Japan
is still higher, with $1400M identified
This 16% drop in the number of deals is evidence to the fact that new interest in investment needs to be created if start-up nanotechnology businesses are to continue emerging There are some difficulties in identifying UK private spend in Nanotechnology UK investment in nanotechnology infrastructure and R&D has been significant in recent years The Technology Strategy Board3 points to the £150M joint investment with approximately 50%
as industrial investment as part of the Government’s initiative in the Micro and Nano Manufacturing Initiative which includes microfluidics, MEMs and nanotechnologies
Trang 13Nanoscale technology impact in
2007 ($M)
Predicted Nanoscale technology impact in
Flame retardant materials for aircraft, protective coatings, lighter body armour (CNTs)
Self repairing structures, smart uniforms, sensors for biological and chemical threat detection, electronics in spacecraft
Smart air/spacecraft
Intelligent connected world
Electronics and ICT
Magnetic nanoparticles for data storage
Electronic nanoscale materials for dielectrics
Flexible displays, nanocomposite heat management, nanowire electronic and photonic devices, nanosilver die attach
Carbon nanotube single electron transistors, non volatile random access memory, molecular diodes, single hybrid molecular device, semiconductor single electron devices (quantum dots), graphene based circuits
Molecular memory Solid state quantum computing
Security of supply/growing population
Energy
Nanocrystalline coated solar cells, nano porous aerogels, nanoparticle additives for energy efficiency
Nanocatalysts for fuel cells
Nanomembranes for fuel cells
Thermoelectric materials for heat conversion, carbon nanotube fuel cells and batteries, carbon nanotube hydrogen storage, polymer and hybrid photovoltaics
Potential for wind power applications
Ageing/growing population
Life Sciences and Healthcare
Nanotitania implants, nano-particle drug delivery, antibacterial coatings, healing wound dressings, lab- on-a-chip
Dendrimers in technology assay kits
bio-Biocompatible implants, magnetic nanoparticles as imaging agents, nanocoated stents for tissue engineering, non- invasive therapeutics using heat to treat cancer
Smart materials for organ and limb replacements
Low impact
Strength increase/crack prevention, self healing additives to cement, exterior protection coatings, anti-graffiti coatings, self cleaning glass, nanoadditives to steel, heat blocking windows
Aerogels for insulation, heat resistant materials
Self repairing structural materials
Smart sensors to monitor fracturing and flexibility, intelligent buildings
Healthcare,
Self cleaning fabrics, wound dressings, healing textiles, antibacterial garments
Fire retardant textiles
Wearable computers, smart clothing, bioresponsive clothing
Self healing textiles
Security of water supply
Environment and Water
Air filtration, titania photocatalysts, nanoporous membranes for filtration
Nanoscale absorbents Desalination of sea water using nanomembranes;
nanomaterial based products for water treatment (Nanofer)
Water purification using bio-nano, NEMS for sensing and acting on pollution,
Growing population
Food and Drink
Nanoemulsions, nanocomposite barrier packaging, nanoporous membranes for processing
Super hydrophobic surfaces, controlled release seed coatings, pathogen detection with nanoparticles
Nanoencapsulated nutraceuticals, programmable barriers in coatings for atmospheric control, electronic tongue
Smart paper for information display and packaging
Quality of life
Consumer Goods and Household Care
Easy clean coatings for surfaces, self cleaning tiles, nanosilver cosmetics and oral care,
nanoencapsulation for beauty care, nanocomposite sporting goods
Nanocoated wipes for surfaces, self cleaning sprays (short lasting)
Nanoencapsulation for household hygiene and fragrancing
Long term self cleaning wipes and sprays, nanoelectronics in leisure equipment
Security
Brand and Product Security
Intelligent inks, nanoparticles for security printing
Paper like electronic displays for condition information, magnetic nanoparticle tagging
Decontaminating surfaces, nanoparticle chemical markers
Smart dust for decontamination
Transport,
Nanofillers for structural enhancement, anti bio- fouling and corrosion resistant coatings
Thermal barrier materials for engines
Fuel cells, embedded sensors Cloaking for warships
Intelligent
Nanofillers for structural enhancement, fuel additives, scratch proof
Thermal barrier materials for engines
Shape memory alloys, fuel cells Smart tyres
Table 6
Technology Readiness Levels (TRL)3
Technology Strategy Board data3
which classifies the opportunity according to the current TRL is shown
in Table 6
The important observation here is the wide range of opportunities at different TRLs ranging from basic research through to near market readiness The volume supply of commercial nanomaterials into mature markets such as carbon black and silica sols should also not be overlooked in this review
This spread of opportunities at different TRLs emphasizes the need for managed private and state funding
in order to maximize the UK position
in IP generated, know how and the
associated commercial position arising within a highly competitive market
The Taylor Report2 emphasised the multidisciplinary nature of the opportunities and there exists much scope for engaging the technology transfer, knowledge transfer and training instruments to make best use
of the underlying science, technology and innovation capacities in the
UK In the end, it is the availability
of people with necessary skills that allows translation of opportunity into exploitation Skills and training are necessary but not sufficient conditions for this Given the global context it
is also clear that it is unrealistic to expect that the UK can achieve strong positions in all of these domains, and that prioritisation will be needed This will be a key challenge
Trang 14KNT - Photonix
Eminate
The Bio Nano Centre NanoCentral
Comina
NanoForce Technology CEMMNT Safenano
Qudos National Prototyping Facility
Cyclofluidic
10 UK Capability and
Capacity to Exploit
The capability of the UK to exploit the
emerging opportunities highlighted
depends on a number of factors:
• That there exists a market
opportunity for application of a
nanotechnology or nanoenabled
product to have impact
• That market opportunity is
not excessively constrained by
competitor activity
• That this opportunity is relevant
to a working and responsive UK
supply chain
• That translation of the concept
from low to high TRLs can be
supported by robust academic
and industrial research
• That eventual exploitation is not
constrained or blocked by any
of the barriers (health, insurance,
environmental etc) which are
considered elsewhere
• That there is adequate support in
terms of facilities, funding, skills and
direction
• That innovation is protected by
commensurate patent actions
The combination of constraints applies
some natural filters which lead to a
prioritisation of the UK exploitation
route These factors are considered in
more detail:
• There is good documentation
of the market opportunity
but forecasts need to be
examined critically in terms of
the constraints which might
limit market uptake The size of the market opportunity is one
of the key determinants for prioritizing innovation activity so good market data and business awareness is essential The other main determinant here is time to market, which likewise might be affected by potential exploitation barriers, such as insurance and regulation Ranking by market size might be misleading because of segmentation
• The competitive position is fast moving and time to market is more important than in many other industrial contexts
• The health of the supply chain
is probably the strongest determinant The most important supply chains for the UK include Aerospace, Automotive, Chemicals, Consumer Products, Energy, Environmental, Healthcare and ICT The published R&D scoreboards of companies provide
an indication of the readiness of a supply chain to innovate either by itself or in concert with academic groups
• The nanoscale technology industry includes a mix of university spin-outs, small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and large, multinational companies that may focus a percentage (usually < 2%) of their research and development work
on applications incorporating nanoscale technologies
• The UK has strong academic groups working in the field The Nanotechnology KTN database indicates that there are over 60 academic groups engaged in nanotechnology at some level
The UK science base in selected nanoscale technology areas is strong and initial activities to assist commercialization are in progress through the cross research council nanotechnology coordination group
• In forthcoming years, the ability
to maintain and strengthen the research base across disciplines, and to accelerate the translation
of new discoveries into valuable products, will be two key factors for the UK to achieve a position
as a world leader in selected areas
of nanoscale technology
The 23 MNT open access facilities
in the UK, shown in Figure 8, are supported by combined Technology Strategy Board, RDA and industrial funding - £150M over 3 years Together, with other relevant infrastructure including the DIAMOND light source, the National Measurement System and Health and Safety Laboratory, this represents a robust facilities platform for innovation
UK funding is substantial but still lags behind several competing countries, both in terms of absolute and per capita spend
Skills and training are key issues which may not be adequately supported in
Figure 8
Geographical representation
of the 23 MNT Centres in the UK3